1. NDIIPP Project: Collection and Preservation of At-Risk Digital Geospatial Data Partners: NCSU Libraries Project Lead: Steve Morris NC Center for Geographic Information & Analysis Project Lead: Zsolt Nagy

2. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 2 Project Context Partnership between university library (NCSU) and state agency (NCCGIA) $520,000 funding Focus on state and local geospatial content in North Carolina (state demonstration) Tied to NC OneMap, which provides seamless access to data, metadata, and inventory information

3. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 3 Targeted Content Resource Types GIS “vector” (point/line/polygon) data Digital orthophotography Digital maps Tabular data (e.g. assessment data) Content Producers Mostly state, local, regional agencies Some university, not-for-profit, commercial Selected local federal projects

4. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 4 Vector data (scale, accuracy, currency, etc.)

5. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 5 Time series – vector data Parcel Boundary Changes 2001-2004, North Raleigh, NC

6. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 6 Aerial imagery (image resolution, etc.)

7. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 7 Aerial imagery (image resolution, etc.)

8. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 8 Aerial imagery (image resolution, etc.)

9. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 9 Aerial imagery (image resolution, etc.)

10. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 10 Time series – Ortho imagery Vicinity of Raleigh-Durham International Airport 1993-2002

11. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 11 Tabular data (combined with vector data)

12. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 12 Tabular data (combined with vector data)

13. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 13 Tabular data (combined with vector data)

14. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 14 Earlier Acquisition Efforts NCSU University Extension project 2000-2001 Target: County/city data in eastern NC “Digital rescue” not “digital preservation” Project learning outcomes Confirmed concerns about long term access Need for efficient inventory/acquisition Wide range in rights/licensing Need to work within statewide infrastructure Acquired experience; unanticipated collaboration

15. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 15 Improving Access to Local Content and Services County and City GIS Directories

16. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 16 Processing Ingested Data e.g. Testing for data gaps in county orthophoto sets

17. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 17 Geographic Information Services - Trends Map Collections Paper Maps Data Collections CD-ROMs, File server & FTP access Map Servers Integrate collected data, Web-based mapping Now: Map Portals and Streaming Data Front end to distributed, streaming data (OpenGIS) Map Collections Data Collections Map Servers Map Portals

18. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 18 Content Identification and Selection Work from NC OneMap Data Inventory Combine with inventory information from various state agencies and from previous NCSU efforts Develop methodology for selecting from among “early,” “middle,” and “late” stage products Develop criteria for time series development Investigate use of emerging Open Geospatial Consortium technologies in data identification

19. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 19 Content Acquisition Work from NC OneMap Data Sharing Agreements as a starting point (the “blanket”) Secure individual agreements (the “quilt”) Investigate use of OGC technologies in capture Use METS as a metadata wrapper Ingest FGDC metadata (crosswalk to MODS?) Maybe METS DRM short term; GeoDRM long term Consider PREMIS elements (extract from FGDC?) Consider links to services; version management

20. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 20 Partnership Building Work within context of the NC OneMap initiative State, local, federal partnership State expression of the National Map Defined characteristic: “ Historic and temporal data will be maintained and available” Advisory Committee drawn from the NC Geographic Information Coordinating Council subcommittees Seek external partners National States Geographic Information Council FGDC Historical Data Committee … more

21. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 21 Content Retention and Transfer Ingest into Dspace Look more generically at the issue of putting geospatial content into digital repositories Investigate re-ingest into a second platform Start to define format migration paths Special problem: geodatabases Purse long term solution Roles of data producing agencies, state agencies; NC OneMap; NCSU

22. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 22 End of Project Outcomes Components which become part of state geospatial data infrastructure NC OneMap objectives for long term access Start a dialog about digital preservation; create stories about digital preservation that can be told in geospatial industry venues Components which NCSU Libraries continues for its own business reasons High user demand for local data, historical versions Components which are not sustainable

23. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 23 Big Problems/Issues Management of data versions over time How to “get current object/metadata/DRM” from a given data object? Relation of the canonical metadata package to the ingest (and export) metadata package for a particular repository environment Tailor the canonical package to the repository environment or make the acquaintance when needed? Format migration paths (geodatabases, etc.)

24. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 24 Big Problems/Issues (Continued) Preserving relational databases Role of persistent identifiers Semantic issues (data attributes, etc.) Viability of web services consumption as an archive development approach Getting data sharing agreements to cover preservation use cases Relation of DRM statement & rights for current object to older versions of object

25. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 25

26. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 26 Find – View – Get North Carolina’s Digital Geospatial Data A Comprehensive, Statewide Geographic Data Resource

27. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 27 NC Local Landscape 100 Counties, 92 With GIS 80 Counties with 1 st Run Hi Res DB 60+ Counties with Unique Map Servers. Growing Number of Municipal Systems $162 Million Plus...

28. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 28 NC Geographic Information Coordinating Council (GICC) General Statute 32 Member Council 10 Local Members Committees – LGC; FIC; SGUC; SMAC; TAC Administrative Agency – NC CGIA

29. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 29

30. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 30

31. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 31

32. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 32

33. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 33

34. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 34

35. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 35

36. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 36

37. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 37

38. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 38

39. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 39 NC OneMap Data Survey Contains specific questions about hardware, software, databases, projections, data distribution, metadata, and GIS “framework” data layers (frequency of update, scale, attributes, maintenance, source) For consistency purposes, modeled after the NC Floodplain Mapping GIS Survey Contains questions that address federal homeland security requirements

40. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 40 NC OneMap Initial Data Layers Produced by Cities and Counties

41. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 41  Better informed decisions  Seamless map integration when tapping local, state, and federal data sources  Enhanced statewide coordination and cost-savings  Integration of data from multiple communities and jurisdictions presents new opportunities to address regional issues and problems  NC OneMap is in line with The National Map initiative  Statewide community of geographic data stakeholders tackles the technical and policy issues  Successful intergovernmental collaboration rewards elected officials, government leaders and North Carolina citizens Benefits of NC OneMap

42. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 42

43. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 43 Questions?